Which gun, for a one-gun user, in a worse-case scenario?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Going by what you said in your initial post, I'm going to suggest a Glock 20 in 10 mm auto if capacity and concealability are priorities. As far as an autoloader goes, not counting gimmicky stuff like the Desert Eagle, it's at the top of the power scale. It's without a doubt a huge compromise to a long gun, but it's about as close you can get to a happy medium given your criteria.

If your one gun doesn't absolutely HAVE to be a pistol, it shouldn't be. The only reason I suggested the Glock is that it's probably the most realistic solution to your given problem. For a high capacity autoloader, it's pretty powerful, but it pales in comparison to a rifle or a shotgun.

If you are only able to have one gun, a pistol of any kind would be a poor choice unless maximum conecealibility is of the utmost importance. If you are able to get around the pistol requirement, I'd suggest a pump shotgun. Especially if price is an issue. Aside from pinpoint long range accuracy, there isn't much a shotgun can't do. They are durable, reliable, powerful, proven tools for both hunting and defense. Unless greater range and accuracy are the most important criteria, or your personal preference lies elsewhere, I'd suggest a shotgun. Inside of 100 yds, a 12 gauge with the proper load for the given situation is as good as, or better than just about anything out there. Some of the disadvantages include large, heavy ammunition, poor iron/bead sights for the most part, shotgun accuracy, the need to carry several different types of ammo to cover the basics, relatively low capacity(5 or 6 + 1 standard, although you can get up to 9 + 1 with certain models), slow reload time, and gunsmithing usually necessary to mount optics, unless it's a dedicated slug gun, or something like a Mossberg 590 like I have. But while the 590 comes drilled and tapped for a scope mount, it also comes without a rear sight, making it almost mandatory to make use of this feature. I personally have a holographic sight on mine, and find it to be the quickest, most all around effective sight system for a multi-role shotgun.

If you need to reach out a bit further than the capabilities of a shotgun, or if you feel more comfortable with something of this nature, I'm going to suggest an AK, SKS, Mini 14, or AR. I am personally one of those people who feels most comfortable with something like this. A short list of advantages would be the longer effective range, the ability to carry far more ammo for a given weight, semi auto function, reduced time and simplicity of reloading. I'm running short on time, so I'm not going to type out all the disadvantages. I'm sure you're at least somewhat familiar with them, and if you're not, there are countless places to read about them all over the internet.



Hope this helps!
 
I happen to believe that just like in FerFAL's crisis in Argentina, a high capacity auto pistol is going to become your most valuable firearm. It's a 24/7/365 bodyguard. In a background of social decay, you can carry on as normally as possible and still be armed enough to be a "hard target" to criminals, but not raise alarm or suspicion among random strangers.

Social breakdown and the public corruption that comes with it are going to be much more likely immediate problems than a need to maintain one's self through hunting. A long gun in an urban or suburban setting makes one a threat to any remaining "honest" authorities and an "opportunity" for quick confiscation by corrupt ones. So, unless in a rural area where a long gun can be brandished with impunity, a concealable duty pistol makes more sense as the "one" gun.

Besides, successful and far more stealthy hunting and trapping was done without firearms for most of humanity's stay on this planet. It wasn't the rifle that made men equals in social settings, it was the implicit threat of being discretely or openly armed with a lethal object that gave one deadly range out of arm's reach, something only a handgun can really provide.

Handguns are indeed underpowered, but they can certainly ruin an assailant's apocalypse.
 
I happen to believe that just like in FerFAL's crisis in Argentina, a high capacity auto pistol is going to become your most valuable firearm. It's a 24/7/365 bodyguard. In a background of social decay, you can carry on as normally as possible and still be armed enough to be a "hard target" to criminals, but not raise alarm or suspicion among random strangers.
Click to expand...

+1 Especially in the urban areas, but for us country folk I'd add a shotgun to the sidearm.

I can understand the OP’s budget constraints but I don’t think only one gun is a satisfactory answer.
 
What about a 12-Guage Shotgun, with removable barrels (rifled, choke tube, etc..) and an assortment of slugs, buckshot, and birdshot?
Click to expand...

Are you going to carry all that? A large box of a mere 25 shells weighs about 2.5 lbs.

Even if you're not, the ammo is bulky and aside from the slugs, are very short range.

Also, the ratio of "ammo to meat" is slanted too far the wrong way. To bring down a rabbit with one round of a 1 oz load of #6 shot vs. a .22 LR bringing down that same rabbit down, possibly at greater range, illustrates the point.

Can't shoot a flying bird with a .22? Ok, so you shoot it with your 12 gauge and hit it. Was that enough meat to warrant the shot?

There is "survival" as in foraging for your dinner and there is "survival" where you need to defend against armed looters. Which would you perceive as the greater problem?
 
That said, I think that it really depends where you live. If you live in a city, then your primary objective would be getting the heck outta Dodge.
Click to expand...
IF you have someplace safe to go---rural relatives, vacation home, an inn you can afford to stay in for quite a while, a known campground plus adequate shelter and a stockpile of food/water, etc. If you are planning to drive/hike into the woods with a week's food and water and live off the land in an unfamiliar area while trying to out-forage ten thousand other people, you might be better off in the city or suburbs keeping a low profile and maintaining a neighborhood watch a la Katrina or Argentina. It's hard to say, but only you can assess the risks of staying vs. the risks of leaving in a crisis, because everybody's circumstances are different.
 
Are we reading too deeply into the OP's question?

A one, single gun for a worst case scenario. Owned by someone who rarely shoots. That sounds to me like a pump 20ga or even .410, depending on how much gun they can handle. Simpler is better. With little or no practice, it might be better to just have a simple, reliable point and click weapon. A rifle is a precision instrument.

12ga may have too much kick an prove to be unweildly, especially with a short 20" or less barrel.

Handguns, in my opinion, are a skilled trade. To stay better than mediocre, you have to practice regularly. To just put away for a rainy day may not be that effective for the given scenario.

Just some thoughts, but if its gonna be for "just in case" a simple 20ga pump and at least 50rds of slugs and buckshot, 50rds birdshot, you're covered for all survival needs on the most minimal cost and practice level.
 
this has been on my mind recently, on another forum some asked this queston after watching the movie the road. they had a discussion on how much ammo is enough. in one of the responses, it was suggested to read the fiction books patriots & one second after. which i went ahead & did, although they are fiction they depict what i believe things would look like after a disaster. the patriots was after an economic collapse & the other was after an emp goes off. i realized how much i didnt know or just hadn't thought about. they are both great books.
 
1 + on using crossbows, and traps for small game rather than firearms. Save the noise. Even bears become habituated to come to a gun shot for food. I also think a quality shotgun with ammo will cover the needs well. That being said. Depending on where I am when SHTF all I may have with me is my sidearm.
ll
 
There is "survival" as in foraging for your dinner and there is "survival" where you need to defend against armed looters. Which would you perceive as the greater problem?
Click to expand...

At best you have to pick the platform that gives you the best chance at both; neither would be fulfilled 100% nor is each individual going to excel in both areas.

That’s why I choose a gun with some flexibility built in, and it’s all about knowing your limitations.
 
Personally, I feel the handgun will be your number one priority as far as weapons are concerned. Following hurricane Katrina, no one with a long gun was allowed to get very far, and food wasn't a priority for most folks the first couple days.

Get a reliable, semi-auto handgun, a few mags for it, and train to defend yourself from violent criminals. But, even before you go shopping for a gun, buy a quality water filter with a spare filter cartridge. I recommend the Katadyn Hiker. After that, you can think about guns.

If I had to leave home, I would highly consider the combination of a Glock pistol, and the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 that would accept the same magazines. A long gun and a handgun that use the same ammo and mags, and weigh a total of 5 1/2 pounds combined, would be a hard combo to beat if on foot. I don't personally own this combination, but I think it would serve this purpose well.

One more thing. If you're thinking about living off the land from a survival standpoint, contact Cody Lundin at http://codylundin.com/. He'll be a lot more help to you than the guy behind the counter at the gun store.
 
Last edited:
I'm a little late to the game here, but...

These "what gun for " SHTF type threads can be a fun intellectual exercise. For those of us with half a dozen or more guns they can be a fun excuse to buy another gun (and a way to prepare for that one in a billion scenario- those things we don't really need to be prepared for, but if everything else is covered, why not).

In this case, it sounds like you are looking to buy your one and only gun and you are thinking end of society SHTF scenarios. Forget them, society ending, every man for himself, SHTF scenarios are so unlikely that to prep for them before much more likely needs are covered is, well, silly.

So, what uses are more realistic? Home defense, CCW, hunting if you are interested in starting to hunt (before any SHTF situation), plinking, target shooting, etc.

Even in the kind of SHTF scenarios that we may see in our lifetimes (Argentina or Great Depression like collapse of the economy, extreme localized natural disasters like Katrina, less extreme natural disaster situations, urban rioting), our likely gun needs mirror our everyday needs. In most, we are more likely to hole up in our homes than bug out, and in most (including where we may need to evacuate) we will want to be more under the radar than we'd be toting a long gun.

First, I'd get a home defense pistol. Preferably something semi-compact (CZ Compact, Glock 19, 3" K-frame, SIG 229, etc.). It can always be on your person when you need it (i.e. it can be very quick to get to). In a pinch, any auto 9mm and above, or revolver .38spl and above can even be used for light hunting. Heck, even in the complete societal breakdown you are envisioning, as has already been pointed out, you will usually be doing something (cooking, clearing, chopping wood, gathering, building, etc.) and you won't be standing guard like a soldier with your long gun in your hands. A handgun will be far more easily accessible when you need it.

Next I'd get a rifle. Yes, a shotgun can be very versatile as many have pointed out, but the shells are bulky and heavy (a problem in your SHTF scenario, or in real life for those of us with limited storage). A revolver caliber lever gun is very versatile as well, the ammo is more compact, and it makes a good self-defense or hunting gun (.357 can be used for both large-game and small-game hunting with the right loads). A .223 would also be good for home defense, and can be used for most hunting needs.

For a one gun only household, I'm not sure I'd want a shotgun. Sure, they are very versatile, but in addition to the ammo, you may not enjoy shooting them. Some people love them, but if you are a casual shooter you may not. A 12ga shooting heavy buckshot or slugs feels like being punched in the shoulder. You may not want as much range time with it as a rifle or pistol, and finding places to practice with your defense or hunting load may not be easier either. Meanwhile, range time to become proficient with your gun is essential.

For some of the possible economic collapse situations (not entirely unlikely) I'd want a .22 rifle. Small game is easier to hunt than large game- it is more plentiful, and hunting seasons are usually longer (if restricted at all). My dad grew up a dirt poor farmboy in Western Pennsylvania. They had a 30-30 and a 30-06 for deer hunting, but they largely relied on small game hunted with the .22 to put meat on the table. Also, if you get to where you find it too expensive to put meat on your table at the store, you may find the larger calibers to be too expensive (look at what a box of even 30-30 costs now, then look at a brick of .22).

For the highly unlikely SHTF where we are looking at the end of society as we know it, I'd also prefer a .22lr rifle to put food on the table. Others have already pointed out that .22lr is cheaper and easier to store. If society actually was to end and resupply became uncertain, you would have to rely on what you already had stockpiled and you may need it for a long time. Most people can afford to stockpile a lifetime supply of .22lr (even in a pretty limited time period if they had to) but not most other calibers. What is a brick of 500 today, $12-20? That same 500 rounds of even the cheaper centerfire calibers (.223, 762x39, 30-30) is going to be over $200 (well over in many calibers). Then there is space- you can store several thousand rounds of .22lr in a fishing tacklebox, you'd need most of your closet for most other rifle calibers. Also, a .22 rifle is relatively quiet and you'd be less likely to attract unwanted attention. I'd still want a pistol for my self-defense needs (think individual and family protection here, going into combat isn't going to happen).
 
+1 on Kingcreek. A 12 gauge pump gun is a really versatile gun and can be used for things such as short/medium range self defense, small game hunting, medium/large game hunting, and birds. If it's something that you would be able to have accessories for, you can have several different barrels and several choke combinations, along with many varations on loads ranging from bird shot, to buckshot, to slugs. I may be wrong, but the max. effective range of an accurate slug is about ~150- 200 yards; not as accurate as a rifle, but still plenty accurate and I'd take that trade-off since you'd still have a whole lot more versatility than a rifle.

That's really only for a situation where you can only have one gun, though. Rifles, pistols, and shotguns all have advantages and disadvantages and have been around for a long time because of that. I think that guns are like a lot of other things, there really isn't one gun that will work as well for all situations as a gun for each specific type of situation. I think that at minimum, you need one rifle, one shotgun, and one pistol. That way you can taylor each one of those guns to the uses you think you'll need them for, and each one will work better at that specific use than asking one gun to do the job of three guns.

In short: if you can only get one gun, get a shotgun. But you also should have a rifle and pistol in addition to that.
 
Last edited:
+1 on Kingcreek. A 12 gauge pump gun is a really versatile gun and can be used for things such as short/medium range self defense, small game hunting, medium/large game hunting, and birds. If it's something that you would be able to have accessories for, you can have several different barrels and several choke combinations, along with many varations on loads ranging from bird shot, to buckshot, to slugs. I may be wrong, but the max. effective range of an accurate slug is about ~150- 200 yards; not as accurate as a rifle, but still plenty accurate and I'd take that trade-off since you'd still have a whole lot more versatility than a rifle.
Click to expand...
Actually, you'll only get decent accuracy at 100 yards or beyond with a dedicated slug gun, generally with a rifled barrel and rifle-type sights (or a scope), and that is not going to be all that versatile as shotguns go.

One question though---other than hunting birds, what can you do with a shotgun that you can't do with, say, a .223 or 7.62x39mm carbine? I don't see a 16" AR as being any less versatile than a shotgun, and the AR gives you capabilities that the shotgun does not beyond 100 yards. I'm not knocking shotguns, but I don't find myself agreeing with the unstated assumption that rifles aren't similarly versatile.
 
Have you thought to see what single weapon, since the invention of reliable gunpowder has overwhelmingly been? What did the majority of explorers, and mountain men take? Soldiers, adventurers and empire builders? Was it a shotgun? Pistol? No. It was a rifle. Shotguns and pistols were packed after the rifle and it's gear was selected. The Pennsylvania rifle, the Kentucky rifle, the Plains Rifle, Trapdoors, Sharps, Remington rolling blocks, Martinis,Spencers, Henrys, Winchesters, Springfields, Mausers- all rifles and the first choice to be carried into the wildest, most dangerous places on earth.

Make mine a rifle
 
I've read lots of these "one gun posts" .
1st , forget about "living off the land" . A] If it was a "worst case scenario event" , you could not bag enough game to feed you or your family . B] you are relatively inexperienced with guns and probably with hunting . C] If things were that bad , game would become very scarce very fast .
That said , IMO , a 12ga. pump or double barrel shotgun would be a good choice . Versatile , easy to maintain , many choices of ammo , almost everybody who owns a gun has at least 1 shotgun , used by military and police for years , great for hunting and self defence . It's the multitool of guns .
 
probably a .22 rifle of somekind and an additional handgun in .357 you can kill a black bear with .357 and its the biggest they get around here.

a .22 will kill deer birds squirrels rabbits pretty much anything if you do your part its light and you can carry a lot more ammunition 100 rounds of .22lr could fit in something the size of a ciggarette pack.

i would find myself hard pressed to lug around 100 rounds or a long term ammount of 12 guage expecialiy mixing it between slugs and birdshot it sounds good at home but even going through the feild for a few hours with 25 rounds of birdshot and the gun you will feel the weight if you dont work out.
 
If 6.8spc ammo were as available as .223 or 7.62X39 my rifle would be my RRA AR, but since it isn't I'd have to grab my SLR-95. Ammo is readily available and inexpensive. These rifles are handy, hi capacity, utterly reliable, .30 caliber and everyone (even looters) recognize the profile, a good deterent in itself. The milled receiver version I own is accurate.
For a pistol I'd take my Glock 23, they are also handy in size, hi capacity, utterly reliable and in an effective caliber.
 
I vote Ruger 10/22. Few parts, very plentiful and you can carry TONS of ammo. It works for self defense because it will shoot as fast as you can pull the trigger and 3 or 4 shots would definitely kill someone/thing if put in the right spot. there is PLENTY of high-cap magazine options out there and optics as well! :]
 
Have you thought to see what single weapon, since the invention of reliable gunpowder has overwhelmingly been? What did the majority of explorers, and mountain men take? Soldiers, adventurers and empire builders? Was it a shotgun? Pistol? No. It was a rifle. Shotguns and pistols were packed after the rifle and it's gear was selected. The Pennsylvania rifle, the Kentucky rifle, the Plains Rifle, Trapdoors, Sharps, Remington rolling blocks, Martinis,Spencers, Henrys, Winchesters, Springfields, Mausers- all rifles and the first choice to be carried into the wildest, most dangerous places on earth.

Make mine a rifle
Click to expand...
This was true once upon a time.
But consider how things have changed in our world....

Those pioneers and mountain men and adventurers were exploring a world that was not so populated and not so settled as the one we live in today.
And many of the indigenous peoples these frontiersmen encountered did not have firearms at all.
Also consider that the average handgun at the time was a 6-shot revolver, often a slow reloading black-powder revolver at that.

But a person trying to survive in a end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario today faces different threats.
There are not that many wild and unsettled places these days.
And the "natives" today also have firearms (Glocks, CZ's, S&W's, Mossberg's, Makarov's, AK's, etc....).

If you are staying put and defending your refuge, then certainly long-guns are a must have.
But if you're wandering the countryside and moving from place to place, carrying everything you own on your back, then a long-gun might not me the best option.

The biggest negative to carrying a long-gun is that it instantly makes one appear to be a threat.
And when you're wandering form place to place, through the proverbial backyard of others (others who have a huge defensive advantage) the last thing you want to appear as is a threat.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
What guns would you choose for worse case zoo scenario?
Replies
5
Views
676
Robert
Robert
P
  • Locked
Glock "worse case scenario mods".
2 3
Replies
64
Views
2K
possum
P
L
  • Locked
Average shots fired in average SD scenario
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
D
  • Locked
The cop whos afraid of guns: My roomate
Replies
14
Views
852
Ryder
R
E
  • Locked
A free rifle/pistol case with purchase?
Replies
7
Views
604
DoubleTapDrew
D
Back
Top